A fatal case of bortezomib‐induced lung toxicity in a young adult heart transplant recipient

Bortezomib is approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma but increasingly used in heart transplant (HTx) recipients with antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR). Severe pulmonary toxicity is a rare complication in multiple myeloma patients treated with bortezomib, but has not been described in a solid organ transplant recipient. A 20‐year‐old man 7 years post‐HTx presented with acute rejection with hemodynamic compromise. Endomyocardial biopsy showed mixed rejection (ISHLT grade 2R‐3R acute cellular rejection (ACR) and pAMR 1 (I+) with diffuse C4d staining). Two new high MFI circulating MHC class‐II donor‐specific antibodies (DSA) were detected. Treatment included corticosteroids, antithymocyte globulin, plasmapheresis, IVIG, rituximab, and bortezomib (1.3 mg/m²). Due to rebound in DSA, a second course of bortezomib was started. Thrombocytopenia and peripheral neuropathy prompted a 50% dose reduction during the 2nd course. Shortly after the 3rd reduced dose, the patient developed hypoxemic respiratory failure. Bronchoscopy revealed pulmonary hemorrhage with negative infectious studies. Chest CT showed bilateral parenchymal disease with bronchiectasis and alveolar bleeding. Despite treatment with high‐dose steroids, severe ARDS ensued with multisystem organ failure. The patient expired 23 days after the final dose of bortezomib. Post‐mortem lung histology revealed diffuse alveolar damage, pulmonary fibrosis, and hemorrhage. Cardiac histology showed resolving/residual ACR 1R and pAMR 1 (I+). While rare, bortezomib‐induced lung toxicity (BILT) can occur in HTx recipients and can carry a high risk of mortality. Drug reaction and immediate drug withdrawal should be considered in patients who develop respiratory symptoms, though optimal management of BILT is unclear.     

Project for Universal Management of Airways – part 1: concept and methods

Multiple professional groups and societies worldwide have produced airway management guidelines. These are typically targeted at the process of tracheal intubation by a particular provider group in a restricted category of patients and reflect practice preferences in a particular geographical region. The existence of multiple distinct guidelines for some (but not other) closely related circumstances, increases complexity and may obscure the underlying principles that are common to all of them. This has the potential to increase cognitive load; promote the grouping of ideas in silos; impair teamwork; and ultimately compromise patient care. Development of a single set of airway management guidelines that can be applied across and beyond these domains may improve implementation; promote standardisation; and facilitate collaboration between airway practitioners from diverse backgrounds. A global multidisciplinary group of both airway operators and assistants was assembled. Over a 3-year period, a review of the existing airway guidelines and multiple reviews of the primary literature were combined with a structured process for determining expert consensus. Any discrepancies between these were analysed and reconciled. Where evidence in the literature was lacking, recommendations were made by expert consensus. Using the above process, a set of evidence-based airway management guidelines was developed in consultation with airway practitioners from a broad spectrum of disciplines and geographical locations. While consistent with the recommendations of the existing English language guidelines, these universal guidelines also incorporate the most recent concepts in airway management as well as statements on areas not widely addressed by the existing guidelines. The recommendations will be published in four parts that respectively address: airway evaluation; airway strategy; airway rescue and communication of airway outcomes. Together, these universal guidelines will provide a single, comprehensive approach to airway management that can be consistently applied by airway practitioners globally, independent of their clinical background or the circumstances in which airway management occurs.     

Interpersonal Counseling in the Treatment of Adolescent Depression: A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness and Feasibility Study in School Health and Welfare Services

In order to offer early and accessible treatment for adolescents with depression, brief and effective treatments in adolescents’ everyday surroundings are needed. This randomized controlled trial studied the preliminary effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of interpersonal counseling (IPC) and brief psychosocial support (BPS) in school health and welfare services. The study was conducted in the 28 lower secondary schools of a large city in Southern Finland, randomized to provide either IPC or BPS. Help-seeking 12–16-year-old adolescents with mild-to-moderate depression, with and without comorbid anxiety, were included in the study. Fifty-five adolescents received either 6 weekly sessions of IPC or BPS and two follow-up sessions. Outcome measures included self- and clinician-rated measures of depression, global functioning, and psychological distress/well-being. To assess feasibility and acceptability of the treatments, adolescents’ and counselors’ treatment compliance and satisfaction with treatment were assessed. Both treatments were effective in reducing depressive disorders and improving adolescents’ overall functioning and well-being. At post-treatment, in both groups, over 50% of adolescents achieved recovery based on self-report and over 70% based on observer report. Effect sizes for change were medium or large in both groups at post-treatment and increased at 6-month follow-up. A trend indicating greater baseline symptom severity among adolescents treated in the IPC-providing schools was observed. Adolescents and counselors in both groups were satisfied with the treatment, and 89% of the adolescents completed the treatments and follow-ups. This trial suggests that both IPC and BPS are feasible, acceptable, and effective treatments for mild-to-moderate depression in the school setting. In addition, IPC seems effective even if comorbid anxiety exists. Our study shows that brief, structured interventions, such as IPC and BPS, are beneficial in treating mild-to-moderate depression in school settings and can be administered by professionals working at school.

Trial registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03001245.